Re: bewildered

["Josh Ozersky" <jozersky@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I disagree...I think that Dallas traded for Antoine because
they wanted another major offensive weapon, and they got
it.  The contracts mean nothing to Cuban; the Mavs are well
into the luxury tax for years to come.

Josh

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sean Giovanello" <sgiovanello@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Art Silva'" <vzd1s1hb@xxxxxxxxxxx>; <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 6:24 PM
Subject: RE: bewildered


> I cannot imagine this team protecting Raef in the expansion draft and it
> is beyond even my wildest dreams that the Bobcats or any other team
> would want him at that price.  To get rid of Raef, Dallas gave up a # 1
> pick (of debatable value but many of you Walker types believe this is a
> huge deal, Mill's contract which translates into a deadline chit, and a
> promising young player in Jiri who would have been ideal for Dallas
> coming off the bench).  Depending on your views, they either were forced
> to take on one of the worst contracts in the game which comes along with
> a poor player and poorer attitude or they saw that Walker would have
> value to them on the court this year and would be easily tradeable next
> year for value (which Raef wont be) and could not say no to this deal.
> Regardless, this deal was motivated by Cuban's desire to be rid of a
> horrible horrible mistake in signing Raef to those dollars and those
> years.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-celtics@xxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-celtics@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> Of Art Silva
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 6:16 PM
> To: celtics@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: bewildered
> 
> The question at hand is not whether Raef is better than Blount or even
> if he
> is worth his contract. It's who do you protect in the expansion draft.
> There
> is no way the Bobcats take a 10 million dollar contract. They only have
> to
> take 14 players from the 27 teams available. Add to that the fact that
> they
> have a significantly lower salary cap it is unlikely they'll saddle
> themselves with a large contract.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Shawn Niles" <shizzjr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <karadag1@xxxxxxxxx>; <renrile@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 2:50 PM
> Subject: RE: bewildered
> 
> 
> > Raef has 3 years left after this year. After this year 40 million of
> his
> > salary will have been paid meaning the C's owe him 30 mil over the
> next 3
> > years. I don't think that is all that bad for a mobile passing big man
> who
> > can shoot. I've never bought all the talk about how Raef is
> untradeable.